When talking about comic companies such as DC and Marvel we are talking about hundreds of writers and artists, thousands if are including companies histories, thousands of characters, dozens and dozens of ongoing books, that cover different teams and solo characters and genres and a bunch of other variables I can't care to go in to. We also have to factor in money. That and how we create a criteria, define it and measure it comparatively as far as entities and the like go.
DC and Marvel don't really micromanage to the extent and context I think you assert. If Marvel and DC are doing something its got nothing to do with what they fear or are willing to risk creatively, or about one pandering by taking advantage of its cross medium successes, or one being more experimental, its all really about how they can most effectively make money both short term and long term whilst ensuring the means to grow as a company/not lose ground which in very simple terms means making the most of their creative talents and creative and intellectual properties (characters and so on) and they have different ideas on how to do that. Giving a character a solo book is not a good way to use a character if they might be better off in a team book. Both companies have won various awards for how they use minorities. Both seem to have periods where some numbers seem to hint at something (like how a few months ago Marvel had way more female creators) but most of that is superficial stuff that gets used in silly Marvel vs DC arguments. Bluewater comics uses a ton of females in their books, should they be praised for that? Basically to draw any genuinely well made points about how female characters for example are used one has to establish a rigid and objective criteria, and thats hard as far as fictional and subjective elements.
Emma Frost at various points has been at the forefront of X-Men comics, but for many her characterization was so poor to many this was more of a negative. Earth 2 for a while had Powergirl and Huntress in it, but was received as negatively. So it should never be simply about what characters have solos or appear a lot, its far more nuanced than that and we have to be careful how we judge companies that main goal is to make money about what they are good and bad at. Especially forgetting that fellow fans play a part here as well, many amazing and excellent solo and team books by both companies, but fans didn't support them so they were cancelled. X-23 had a great series for example, but didn't sell as well as hoped so was cancelled. Book was quality, some fans supported it but not enough, and thats how that essentially works. Marvel putting out a solo book for a character means using up a writer and an artist and other creative talent that could be working somewhere else. So they have to think wisely before committing talent there for a book that might only last 8 issues. Should Marvel and DC do that just so they can brag about having more temporary solo titles with female, black Asian bisexuals?! This would not only hurt those characters that get the series but other characters and books and their creative talent and us the fans and customers. Bad bad business and creative practices.
Personally I'd love all the books mentioned in OP and the nature of the comics industry is that at some point we may get them and more, but I don't want these books to come about for bragging rights nor as attempts to superficially insert diversity into comics at the expense of hurting characters, creative talents and us the fans. I have nothing against team books either which generally tend to be a great place where diversity excels because it combines a lot of characters that appeal to a lot of different fans strengthening sales. Team books also help build characters to a point where solo series may be a more likely prospect but even with that there are other factors that need to be taken into consideration. Nice thread, nice questions.
Log in to comment